Help identifying the source of two "Why Superman can't have kids' scenes

[PersonaDark]

I rememeber picking two issues that dealt with the subject a long time ago, but can't remember for the life of me who wrote them and which issues they were. So I ask if anyone remembers these.

Scene 1. Things start ok. Superman doing his thing, saving lives and handling a huge crisis halfway around the world. At the same time, we see a very pregnant Lois waiting at home for his return, speaking with the Kents. Switching back and forth between her and Superman having a hell of a time with things, Lois suddenly collaspes. Doctors try to save her life and the baby's but in the end they fail. When Superman returns, he's crushed by the truth of the matter: The Baby kicked, unknowingly causing Internal Bleeding in Lois with it's strength.

Later thankfully, it's proven to be some kind of illusion, meant to teach Superman a lesson or something. Lois is alive. Can't remember who was responsible.

Scene 2: Lex Luthor is celebrating the birth of his son, with Superman present. (I'm not entirely clear, but this seems to be the Clone Lex who was with Matrix-Supergirl.) Just out of spite, He tells Superman that he had his scientists check his DNA a while back. It's completely incompatible with humans. he goes on to taunt him about being the last of his kind and never knowing the joy of fatherhood as he plays with the baby.

Artwise, I vaguely remember it looking like the style used in Death and Return of Superman, if that helps.

[dancj]

I've no idea about those two, but in one of the Superman Armageddon 2001 annuals, Lois was killed when their unborn baby kicked in her stomache

Dan

[Shellhead]

You should go to the original source on this topic:

Larry Niven wrote "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" in 1971, and this is a link to a copy of that essay:

http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html

Here's a quote from the article:

"Superman has been known to leave his fingerprints in steel and in hardened concrete, accidentally. What would he do to the woman in his arms during what amounts to an epileptic fit?"

[PersonaDark]

Thanks guys. ^_^

[Project 22]

He´s an alien...we are humans...can you have a child with a monkey which is genetically closely related to you? I know I can´t.

[Project 22]

He´s an alien...we are humans...can you have a child with a monkey which is genetically closely related to you? I know I can´t.

[Project 22]

He´s an alien...we are humans...can you have a child with a monkey which is genetically closely related to you? I know I can´t. Superman probably isn´t even a carbon-based life form, so it wouldn´t even make sense that he could procreate with a human. Also to paraphrase Kevin Smith via Jason Lee, Lois couldn´t carry Superman´s child because her uterus isn´t strong enough to hold the child. If he shoots semen, it would probably fire though her back. Since this is post-crisis, Superman didn´t get his powers until he was a teen, so that wouldn´t be a problem, as the infant would be as powerful as a normal human.

[Sizzle]

This is certainly an amusing converstation.

Superman has to have control over the amount of power he exerts. Otherwise he'd blow his pants clean off when he ripped one. He'd destroy restrooms going to the bathroom. Sneezing would blow everying away.

So theoretically, he would have control over his powers during intercourse.

[Ontir]

There are so many "ifs" here.

To start off, Byrne and Wolfman nixed the idea of "woman of Kleenex" (but if you insist, that's why God made turkey basters!!!) in the eighties, when Clark was sleeping with Cat Grant. Given that Lois is Clark's wife, and has been for years, I think it's safe to assume it's not platonic, and while I can't give you issue and page, I seem to recall a scene now and again, which strongly suggests they'd had sex.

Pre-Crisis, there was a great deal of writing, which connected ancient Earth, to ancient Krypton. That might have something to do with it.

Then, there's always: "SUPRISE! Lois has the meta-gene, and it allowed her to coneive a child with Superman!!!"

Ultimately, it's a comic book. If the writers/editors want a super-kid, it's going to happen, with some plausable explanation.

[Lorendiac]

Scene 2: Lex Luthor is celebrating the birth of his son, with Superman present. (I'm not entirely clear, but this seems to be the Clone Lex who was with Matrix-Supergirl.) Just out of spite, He tells Superman that he had his scientists check his DNA a while back. It's completely incompatible with humans. he goes on to taunt him about being the last of his kind and never knowing the joy of fatherhood as he plays with the baby.

I don't remember Lex celebrating the birth of a son in any story that was "in continuity," but around the mid-to-late 1990s he married the mysterious Contessa Erica Alexandra del Portenza and in due course she gave birth to their daughter (whom Lex named Lena Luthor). I think Lex may have said something along the lines you describe to Superman around that time, but I'd have to check. I don't recall the exact issue or the exact title (there were about five Superman titles all tightly tied together into one ongoing soap opera at the time!).

Meanwhile, if you're really interested in reading more about this sort of thing: You've reminded me of a piece I wrote and posted here on the CBR forums last year. In it, I tried to list and summarize all of the different answers that various writers have tried to sell to us, at one time or another, regarding just what could happen if Superman tried to mate with an Earthwoman. I came up with about eight different answers that have been stated or hinted at, one way or another, over the years.

I believe I concluded that the editors at DC apparently have an interesting policy on Superman's chances of successfully mating with an Earthwoman. From all the different and sometimes contradictory stories they've allowed to be published over the years, I figure their policy is: "We absolutely refuse to commit ourselves to one single Official Policy on this controversial subject! We let every writer do his own thing for the sake of any given story! He can ignore the implications of other published stories if he wants to! And that's our policy!" Or words to that effect :)

Here's a link if you want to look at all the details of what I came up with last year!

Superhero Reproduction (Part 10): Interspecies Mating (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=54369)

(In case you're wondering about the "Part 10" in the title, it was just part of a lengthy series of essays I wrote and posted about various peculiar situations that can arise when comic book superheroes are trying to settle down and get married and start raising kids like normal people do in the real world. Come to think of it, I never did finish that series. But if you find it at all interesting, there are links at the bottom of that essay to places where all of the previous 9 installments are archived.)

[Jack Zodiac]

"Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" is one of the stupidest articles ever conceived, and the idea that the baby would somehow kick a hole in Lois's uterus is equally absurd. Kryptonians are powered by solar energy and gain their power over years of constant exposure to it. Even if, somehow, that radiation were able to reach Superbaby inside pregnant Lois, in the course of nine months, the fetus wouldn't gain any amount of super powers.

[Lorendiac]

"Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" is one of the stupidest articles ever conceived, and the idea that the baby would somehow kick a hole in Lois's uterus is equally absurd. Kryptonians are powered by solar energy and gain their power over years of constant exposure to it. Even if, somehow, that radiation were able to reach Superbaby inside pregnant Lois, in the course of nine months, the fetus wouldn't gain any amount of super powers.

You're getting your timeframes mixed up, I think. Post-Crisis Kryptonians in stories published in the last 20 years or so are basically walking, talking solar batteries, as you suggest. And yes, according to at least some writers, they need to get exposed to a lot of yellow solar energy in order to end up with the level of strength (and other powers) that Superman displays now that he is a grown man. John Byrne's "Man of Steel" miniseries 20 years ago first established the idea that as a baby and a toddler, Clark Kent was pretty much "normal" and his strength and other powers only gradually developed over many years. Even at age 18, I'm not sure he was fully powered yet.

But Niven wrote his essay back around 1969, long before the Post-Crisis Reboot of Superman's biology and general continuity, and in those days it was firmly "in continuity" that Clark had been a "Superbaby" back in the day, already superstrong and invulnerable and able to fly and so forth. So if the Official Version (then) said that he had been high-powered ever since he landed on Earth as an infant, it was not ridiculous for Niven to suggest (at the time) that a growing fetus, half-Kryptonian, might already be developing and using such powers in a terrestrial, yellow-sunlight environment, even before the moment of childbirth.

If Niven had written his essay just five or ten years ago, I would tend to agree with you that he was ignoring many important details of Superman's "modern" continuity for the sake of making everything sound more dangerous than it "really was." But that wasn't the way it happened. :)

[CaptainAwesome]

If Superman so out of control of his powers that every time he touched something he crushed it, then how could he catch people falling from buildings or even walk on the ground? No, thats a pretty stupid argument. Also, according to the movies, the kid doesnt seem to develop all of his powers right away, so why would he automatically have super-strength, especially with no direct contact to a yellow sun?

But, alas, I dont think Superman should have a biological kid in the comics. I think it would be much more poetic if he adopted.

[Smarty Jones]

So let me get this straight: You don't have a problem with Superman having a biological child in the movie "Superman Returns," but you want him to adopt in the comic books? Please explain your logic.

[Dussan]

If Superman so out of control of his powers that every time he touched something he crushed it, then how could he catch people falling from buildings or even walk on the ground? No, thats a pretty stupid argument. Also, according to the movies, the kid doesnt seem to develop all of his powers right away, so why would he automatically have super-strength, especially with no direct contact to a yellow sun?

But, alas, I dont think Superman should have a biological kid in the comics. I think it would be much more poetic if he adopted.

It's not about being out of control with his powers it's about the reality of those powers mean.

He can pick up a 747, meaning he is probably 2000 times stronger then a normal human, at least. Invulnerable. Meaning he can't be hurt. So does he feel anything like pain? Yes. But it's at levels beyond human endurance.

So wouldn't the same be true for pleasure?

Pre-Crisis Supes cant get it on with a woman. The whole idea about it is that Supes powers where because he was from Krypton and Krypton was about the size of Jupiter. Heavy gravity world, meaning EVERYTHINHG was 5 to 10 times denser.

Also there is the simple fact that Supes powers where never clearly explained, and they will never be. The science behind themcontradict themselves.

[CaptainAwesome]

So let me get this straight: You don't have a problem with Superman having a biological child in the movie "Superman Returns," but you want him to adopt in the comic books? Please explain your logic.
Theres really no logic to it.

Before SR the idea of superman having a kid had not crossed my mind. Now that I have seen one version where he has a kid, it got me to thinking about what I would do if I was a writer. I think that Superman adopting a kid would really work better simply because he was adopted. It would not, however, work in SR and I think what they are doing fits perfectly into the pre-established story, Superman the Movie.

[dancj]

The whole idea about it is that Supes powers where because he was from Krypton and Krypton was about the size of Jupiter. Heavy gravity world, meaning EVERYTHINHG was 5 to 10 times denser.

I know that was the case back in the golden age, but was that still the case after they brough in the red/yellow sun thing?

Officially under a red sun, Kryptonians are just like humans, but a human on a planet the size of jupiter would be a puddle, so I can't see how that would work.

[Alan2099]

He´s an alien...we are humans...can you have a child with a monkey which is genetically closely related to you? I know I can´t.
Well, people say you never know until you've tried.

waitaminute

[Slade.]

He´s an alien...we are humans...can you have a child with a monkey which is genetically closely related to you? I know I can´t. Superman probably isn´t even a carbon-based life form, so it wouldn´t even make sense that he could procreate with a human. Also to paraphrase Kevin Smith via Jason Lee, Lois couldn´t carry Superman´s child because her uterus isn´t strong enough to hold the child. If he shoots semen, it would probably fire though her back. Since this is post-crisis, Superman didn´t get his powers until he was a teen, so that wouldn´t be a problem, as the infant would be as powerful as a normal human.


LMMFAO

this made my day wooooooooooooooooooooooooow

thank you